Connect with us

Red Pill

News

Leaked email by Dutch diplomat on MH17 says separatists do not have ability to take down a plane. Kolomoisky being set up for fall?

Following a leaked Dutch diplomat’s email saying it could not have been “separatists” that brought down MH17, we are left with oligarch Ihor Kolomoyskyi who received intelligence that Putin’s aircraft was due to fly over the region, and ordered what was to become the shooting down of the MH17.

Published

on

40 Views

More interesting developments surrounding MH17.

Was last month’s drama surrounding oligarch billionaire Kolomoisky just pretext for the fall he is about to take regarding MH17?

The following is a post that originally appeared on Deep Resource:


One of the largest political public forums in the Netherlands geenstijl.nl and focal point of the Dutch resistance against Islamization of the Netherlands, has published a leaked email, written by a Dutch diplomat and probably sent to colleagues within the Dutch foreign ministry. Date: 14 July 2014, that is three days before the MH17 tragedy. She reports about a briefing of western diplomats by Ukrainian foreign minister Pavlo Klimkin. Klimkin expressed his concern about the escalation of the military situation in the East. He also stresses the danger of the situation in the skies above Donbass and refers to a recent case of an Antonov that was downed from an altitude of 6200 m. The Geenstijl folks use the email to illustrate that the Dutch government knew very well about the dangers of flying over Donbass and (correctly) accuse the Dutch government of negligence and inaction. So far, so good.

But Geenstijl fails to notice a very interesting fact and as a consequence doesn’t draw far-reaching conclusions from it.

The Ukrainian foreign minister openly states that the separatists don’t have the means to take down planes from high altitude and (probably correctly) accuses the Russian Federation of taking the Ukrainian military Antonov down.

That’s quite a statement, made by a Ukrainian foreign minister, three days before the MH17 was shot down, please let that sink in.

Conclusions:

  • The separatists did not do it, because they did not have the means to do it, as per Ukrainian foreign minister’s own admission.
  • Kiev didn’t do it either. You are not going to brief western diplomats on the highest level that the separatists don’t have the means to down the planes, if you intend to setup a false flag operation and blame the separatists anyway.
  • Technically, the Russians could have done it, like they likely did with the Antonov, but unlike the separatists, the Russians knew precisely which plane is what on the basis of radar information and downing a western plane is the last thing the Russians would want to do.

So, if neither the Russians, nor Kiev did it, than who did it?

Kolomoisky.

Quatro non datur.

It must have been a rogue operation by the governor of Dnepropetrovsk, who picked up the phone and ordered a squadron to take out a plane with Vladimir Putin on board. But Putin’s plane decided on a last minute change of course and the Ukrainian fighter jet pilot took down the wrong plane.

It claims that oligarch Ihor Kolomoyskyi received intelligence that the Kremlin president’s aircraft, known as Plane Number One, was due to overfly the region and land at Rostov-on-Don, and ordered what was to become the shooting down of the MH17. This Russian city is close to the crash site. But, it is claimed, Putin’s route was changed and the last minute and he landed instead in Moscow.

[dailymail.co.uk] – MH17 ‘was shot down in botched bid to assassinate PUTIN’

“About an hour before the catastrophe, three fighter jets took off [from Dnepropetrovsk]. One of the planes was an Su-25, which was equipped with these kind of [air-to-air] missiles,”… Once the surviving pilot got out of the plane, he looked “very frightened.”… The Ukrainian pilot’s first words as he got out of the jet were: “Wrong plane,” the alleged witness claimed. Later in the evening that same pilot also reportedly stated: “The plane happened to be in the wrong place at a wrong time.” According to RT, the pilot Vladislav Voloshin is real.

[source]

Right. Diving in our own archive:

[deepresource] – Drunken Kolomoysky Admits Ukraine Did It (Accidently)
[deepresource] – Hackers Learned Who Shot Down MH17 In Ukraine
[deepresource] – MH17 – Dmitro Yakatsuts & Anna Petrenko
[deepresource] – Vladislav Voloshin

These posts probably contain the correct scenario of what really happened.

This could also shed some new light on the recent dumping of Kolomoisky by the Kiev junta:

[deepresource] – Split in the Ukrainian Junta

This could be an indication that Kiev wants to get rid of Kolomoisky, but in the mean time give him the opportunity to pack his bags and take a hike to some ‘shitty little country’ in the Middle East, as French diplomat Daniel Bernard prefers to call it. That’s where this punk belongs anyway.

Well then, the plot thickens, as they say. Russia has shown radar pictures, indicating that a Ukrainian fighter jet was near the MH17 and the Americans did not debunk that with pictures of their own. Ergo, there was a fighter jet near the MH17. The West was and is busy drawing Ukraine from the sphere of influence of Russia into the West, so the last thing they could use was this failed stunt by rogue elements within Ukraine. So the West uses its media propaganda organs to initially blame the Russians and next gradually become silent on the subject, gain time and let some grass grow over the affair. Western strategy is one of damage control, to gain as much time as possible, but in the end they are probably going to let the cat out of the bag, probably by the end of this year. Or they are going to say that they can’t find the true culprit. The Dutch in the end are not going to cover up the killing of 196 of their own citizens and falsely blame the Russians, but are willing to cooperate with the Americans in stalling the judicial process for the price of 122.5 ton repatriated gold. That’s how international politics works.

References:

https://deepresource.wordpress.com/2015/04/05/mh17-leaked-dutch-emails/

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
5 Comments

5
Leave a Reply

avatar
5 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
0 Comment authors
Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
trackback

ccn2785xdnwdc5bwedsj4wsndb

[…]here are some links to web pages that we link to due to the fact we believe they are really worth visiting[…]

trackback

3nvb54wnxd5cbvbecnv5ev75bc

[…]one of our guests a short while ago encouraged the following website[…]

trackback

Title

[…]check below, are some totally unrelated web sites to ours, even so, they may be most trustworthy sources that we use[…]

trackback

Title

[…]Sites of interest we’ve a link to[…]

trackback

Title

[…]we came across a cool internet site that you just could possibly delight in. Take a search if you want[…]

Latest

Lori Loughlin’s daughter was aboard USC official’s yacht in Bahamas when mom was charged

Lori Loughlin’s daughter was on the yacht of USC’s Board of Trustees when her mom was accused in scheme.

The Duran

Published

on

Via Fox News


Lori Loughlin’s daughter Olivia Jade Giannulli was spending spring break on a University of Southern California official’s yacht when her mother was accused Tuesday of involvement in a college admissions scheme, reports said.

Giannulli, 19, was on Rick Caruso’s luxury yacht Invictus in the Bahamas, a report said. Caruso is chairman of USC’s Board of Trustees.

Giannulli, who currently attends USC, was with Caruso’s daughter Gianna and several other friends, the outlet reported.

“My daughter and a group of students left for spring break prior to the government’s announcement yesterday,” Caruso told TMZ. “Once we became aware of the investigation, the young woman decided it would be in her best interests to return home.”

Loughlin’s daughter has since returned to Los Angeles to face the allegations that could result in her getting expelled from USC.

USC’s Board of Trustees will not decide the status of Giannulli and the other students involved in the case, but rather, the university’s president will make the decisions, according to TMZ.

Business deals in jeopardy?

Giannulli is a YouTube beauty vlogger and social media star, but in the midst of her mother’s charges, she may lose the lucrative brand-sponsorship deals she has landed over the years, Variety reported.

HP, having cut ties with Giannulli, said in a statement, “HP worked with Lori Loughlin and Olivia Jade in 2017 for a one-time product campaign. HP has removed the content from its properties.”

Giannulli also cut brand deals with partners including Amazon, Dolce & Gabbana, Lulus, Marc Jacobs Beauty, Sephora, Smashbox Beauty Cosmetics, Smile Direct Club, Too Faced Cosmetics, Boohoo, and Unilever’s TRESemmé, the report said.

Giannulli’s rep declined to comment, Variety reported. Estée Lauder Companies, which owns Smashbox and Too Faced, also declined to comment, while the other brands or companies the magazine reached out to did not immediately respond to their requests for comment.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

$250M Lawsuit Against CNN Imminent; Covington High MAGA Student Suffered “Direct Attacks”

CNN will be the second MSM outlet sued over their reporting of the incident, after Sandmann launched a $250 million lawsuit against the Washington Post in late February. 

Published

on

Via Zerohedge


CNN is about to be sued for more than $250 million for spreading fake news about 16-year-old Covington High School student Nicholas Sandmann.

Sandmann was viciously attacked by left-leaning news outlets over a deceptively edited video clip from the January March for Life rally at the Lincoln Memorial, in which the MAGA-hat-wearing teenager appeared to be mocking a Native American man beating a drum. Around a day later, a longer version of the video revealed that Sandmann did absolutely nothing wrong – after the media had played judge, jury and executioner of Sandmann’s reputation.

CNN will be the second MSM outlet sued over their reporting of the incident, after Sandmann launched a $250 million lawsuit against the Washington Post in late February.

Speaking with Fox News host Mark Levin in an interview set to air Sunday, Sandmann’s attorney, L. Lin Wood, said “CNN was probably more vicious in its direct attacks on Nicholas than The Washington Post. And CNN goes into millions of individuals’ homes. It’s broadcast into their homes.”

They really went after Nicholas with the idea that he was part of a mob that was attacking the Black Hebrew Israelites, yelling racist slurs at the Black Hebrew Israelites,” continued Wood. “Totally false. Saying things like that Nicholas was part of a group that was threatening the Black Hebrew Israelites, that they thought it was going to be a lynching.”

Why didn’t they stop and just take an hour and look through the internet and find the truth and then report it?” Wood asked. “Maybe do that before you report the lies. They didn’t do it. They were vicious. It was false. CNN will be sued next week, and the dollar figure in the CNN case may be higher than it was [against] The Washington Post.”

Watch: 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Rand Paul refuses to support emergency declaration, deepening problem

Rand Paul gives a principled reason for his refusal, and he cannot be faulted for that, but it leaves the borders open and unsafe.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

Senator Rand Paul indicated he will vote to terminate President Trump’s National Emergency Declaration on Sunday. This continues a story that seems to want no resolution.

Weeks ago, the seed to this news piece started this way:

One 35-day partial government shutdown and almost three weeks later, the debate over a statistically tiny amount of money in the US budget for the building of a border wall drags on with no solution. On February 15th, if there is no agreement that is to President Trump’s satisfaction, the government will once again descend into a partial shutdown.

And on February 15th, the President signed a continuing resolution to keep the government open through the rest of the fiscal year. This CR gave sharply limited authority of funds with regards to the border wall. This prompted the President to take it a step farther and declare a National Emergency.

This is because very few people in the US government actually desire a solution to close and secure the American-Mexican border. In fact, what we see is a government that is largely aligned against the will of its citizens.

President Trump has made repeated statements and speeches in which he outlines a fair array of facts concerning the problems experienced in the US by illegal border crossings of both people and controlled substances.

However, the issue of border security remains something that Congress only supports with words. We saw this in action both last week and the week before with the Democrat led House of Representatives voting 245-182 to terminate the National Emergency declaration. While this was to be expected in the House, on March 3rd, libertarian Senator Rand Paul, a known strong supporter of President Trump, nonetheless penned an Op-Ed piece on Fox News in which he said he planned to also vote against the National Emergency in the Republican-led Senate (emphasis added):

In September of 2014,  I had these words to say: “The president acts like he’s a king. He ignores the Constitution.  He arrogantly says, ‘If Congress will not act, then I must.’

Donald J. Trump agreed with me when he said in November 2014 that President Barack Obama couldn’t make a deal on immigration so “now he has to use executive action, and this is a very, very dangerous thing that should be overridden easily by the Supreme Court.”

I support President Trump. I supported his fight to get funding for the wall from Republicans and Democrats alike, and I share his view that we need more and better border security.

However, I cannot support the use of emergency powers to get more funding, so I will be voting to disapprove of his declaration when it comes before the Senate.

Every single Republican I know decried President Obama’s use of executive power to legislate. We were right then. But the only way to be an honest officeholder is to stand up for the same principles no matter who is in power…

There are really two questions involved in the decision about emergency funding:

  • First, does statutory law allow for the president’s emergency orders,
  • and, second, does the Constitution permit these emergency orders?

As far as the statute goes, the answer is maybe — although no president has previously used emergency powers to spend money denied by Congress, and it was clearly not intended to do that.

But there is a much larger question: the question of whether or not this power and therefore this action are constitutional. With regard to the Constitution, the Supreme Court made it very clear in Youngstown Steel in 1952, in a case that is being closely reexamined in the discussion of executive power.  In Youngstown, the Court ruled that there are three kinds of executive order: orders that carry out an expressly voiced congressional position, orders where Congress’ will is unclear, and, finally, orders clearly opposed to the will of Congress.

To my mind, like it or not, we had this conversation.  In fact, the government was shut down in a public battle over how much money would be spent on the wall and border security.  It ended with a deal that Congress passed and the president signed into law, thus determining the amount.

Congress clearly expressed its will not to spend more than $1.3 billion and to restrict how much of that money could go to barriers.  Therefore, President Trump’s emergency order is clearly in opposition to the will of Congress.

Moreover, the broad principle of separation of powers in the Constitution delegates the power of the purse to Congress.  This turns that principle on its head.

Some are attempting to say that there isn’t a good analogy between President Obama’s orders or the Youngstown case. I disagree. Not only are the issues similar, but I think Youngstown Steel implications are even more profound in the case of emergency appropriations. We spent the last two months debating how much money should be spent on a wall, and Congress came to a clear conclusion: $1.3 billion. Without question, the president’s order for more wall money contradicts the will of Congress and will, in all likelihood, be struck down by the Supreme Court.

In fact, I think the president’s own picks to the Supreme Court may rebuke him on this.

Regardless, I must vote how my principles dictate. My oath is to the Constitution, not to any man or political party. I stand with the president often, and I do so with a loud voice. Today, I think he’s wrong, not on policy, but in seeking to expand the powers of the presidency beyond their constitutional limits. I understand his frustration. Dealing with Congress can be pretty difficult sometimes. But Congress appropriates money, and his only constitutional recourse, if he does not like the amount they appropriate, is to veto the bill.

This statement by Rand Paul is extremely – and painfully – fair. It marks not the actions of a liberal but of someone who is trying to do things truly “by the book.” He cannot be faulted for this.

But his “Nay” is very poorly placed because it comes in the context of a Congress that is full of people far less committed to the vision of America and its sovereignty than he or the President are. One of the reasons stated for lax border security is that cutting off illegal immigration also cuts off very cheap labor for several industries. Some of those industry leaders donate lavishly to political campaigns, ergo, corruption.

Rand Paul, in trying to fight for what is right by the letter of the law, may be correct, but in the short term it appears to exacerbate the problem of the porous US-Mexico border.

President Trump is trying to do the right thing in the company of a Congress who does not want this, for various reasons. Some of it is because some Congressmen and women are petty, Nancy Pelosi and Charles Schumer being the crabby National Grandparents in this aspect. But add to the “resist Trump because he is Trump” lobby those people who gain from illegal immigration in the short term, and those like the new socialist crop of Congressional members who are ready to change the very nature of the United States into something like their cannabis-induced dream of Sweden (which didn’t even work in Sweden!) and we see that border security is every bit the uphill climb that President Trump has shown it to be.

The government shutdown did one very good thing: It got the American focus on the border and some opinions on the matter moved – at least among the American people.

But since when did our representatives and senators really represent us, the American people?

It has been a long, long time.

 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending